How rocks remove CO2 from the atmosphere

Amazing stuff! Nature captures/binds much more CO2 than previously thought! Climate models are junk!

More evidence that global warming is a hoax and climate change is a religion!

We still know far too little about the highly complex natural phenomenon called climate! Climate change has become a major subject for demagogues and profiteers!

"Rocks can bind carbon dioxide — and much faster than previously thought. For a long time, it was assumed that the transformation of CO2 into carbonate rock depends on very slow, time-consuming processes. According to that view, the binding of CO2 injected industrially into the ground would take centuries. However, practical observations and theoretical calculations suggested that there may also be a much faster route from CO2 to carbonate, mediated by water acting somewhat like a catalyst. This suspected mechanism has now been demonstrated for the first time at TU Wien, using imaging techniques on the atomic scale. ...

The “bent” carbon dioxide molecule can then attach directly to the wollastonite, forming a stable bond — without the wollastonite having to dissolve first. “Without water, this is not possible, because the right docking site is missing,” says Giada Franceschi. “But even a tiny amount of water is enough to completely change the interaction between CO2 and wollastonite.” ..."

From the abstract:

"The carbonation of silicate minerals is a key process in the Earth’s carbon cycle and offers a promising avenue for long-term CO2 sequestration. However, the atomistic mechanisms by which CO2 is activated at silicate surfaces remain poorly understood, largely due to the intrinsic complexity and insulating nature of these materials.

To close this gap, wollastonite (CaSiO3) is used as a model system. Noncontact atomic force microscopy (nc-AFM) with functionalized tips is combined with density functional theory (DFT) to investigate its lowest-energy (100) surface under ultrahigh vacuum (UHV).

Upon cleaving the mineral in UHV, water vapor is released from the sample and spontaneously readsorbs into a previously unreported, exceptionally stable configuration.

The resulting surface hydration layer promotes spontaneous CO2 chemisorption and the formation of surface carbonates with negligible kinetic barriers.

Our results offer atomic-scale evidence of gas–phase carbonation on a silicate mineral, revealing a water-assisted pathway for CO2 capture that bypasses aqueous mineral dissolution."

How rock removes CO2 from the atmosphere | EurekAlert! "A remarkable mineralogical mechanism has now been demonstrated at TU Wien: with the help of water, certain minerals can convert CO2 into solid carbonate very quickly."

Molecular Views of Mineral Carbonation: Reaction of CO2 with the Wollastonite (100) Surface (open access)

Credits: CO₂ verschwindet schneller im Gestein als gedacht

Graphical abstract

New research suggests the lower stratosphere contains tons more ultrafine aerosol particles than previously thought

More evidence that global warming is a hoax and climate change is a religion!

We still know far too little about the highly complex natural phenomenon called climate! Climate change has become a major subject for demagogues and profiteers!

"Some of the particles with the biggest impact on stratospheric chemistry are so small they have remained mostly invisible to scientists—until now.

New research in Science suggests the lower stratosphere contains tons more ultrafine aerosol particles than previously thought; they are carried upward by rising air currents and atmospheric mixing from the troposphere, the lowest layer of Earth’s atmosphere. Despite their tiny size, the specks add up to large amounts of surface area where atmospheric reactions can occur, some of which can break down ozone and scatter sunlight.

To study these hard-to-detect particles, researchers used instruments aboard NASA’s WB-57 high-altitude research aircraft during the Stratospheric Aerosol Processes, Budget, and Radiative Effects (SABRE) mission in 2023, and measured aerosols up to 19 kilometers above Earth. Particles smaller than 150 nanometers across made up most of the total aerosol surface area, accounting for as much as 90% of the surface area in some regions.

These sub-150-nanometer particles also acted like sponges for condensable vapors: Gases that might otherwise form new aerosols or bulk up larger ones instead stuck to the tiny particles. As they aged, the specks collided, clumped together, and gradually grew larger and fewer. ..."

From the editor's summary and abstract:

"Editor’s summary

The lower stratosphere is rife with a class of extremely small aerosols rich in organic compounds that have been largely underappreciated until now. Lyu et al. showed that these particles, most of which originate in and are transported from the troposphere, dominate the surface area available for heterogeneous chemistry and constitute the major sink for condensable vapors. The consequences of these particles on heterogeneous chemistry and aerosol microphysical processes in the lower stratosphere may be considerable, particularly for geoengineering proposals that involve injecting aerosol precursors into the stratosphere. ...

Structured Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The lower stratosphere is a complex and fascinating region of the atmosphere where air from the troposphere below enters and mixes with air that has been in the stratosphere for years. This region is particularly important to climate and atmospheric chemistry because aerosol particles scatter solar radiation and provide surfaces for heterogeneous reactions that affect stratospheric ozone. Further, many proposed albedo modification by stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) efforts, a form of “geoengineering,” would emit aerosol particles or precursors in this region of the stratosphere to scatter more sunlight to space and cool Earth’s surface. A thorough understanding of the processes that govern aerosol sources, sinks, and characteristics in the lower stratosphere is essential to understand these effects.

RATIONALE

... Therefore, previous measurements have not accurately determined the surface area of these nanoparticles nor quantified their evolution in the stratosphere.

RESULTS

Using multiple instruments on a high-altitude research aircraft, we measured the size distribution and composition of particles in the lower stratosphere at altitudes up to 19 km. Particles with diameters <150 nm dominated the aerosol surface area. These small particles mixed and coagulated with the larger stratosphere background particles, resulting in a bimodal size distribution in the lower stratosphere.

A chemistry-climate model did not replicate this bimodal size distribution.

Our measurements show two distinct sources for the small-particle mode. In older stratospheric air they are sulfuric acid with metals from meteors. In younger stratospheric air influenced by the troposphere, the small-particle mode is mostly tropospheric particles with high organic content, which will affect their reactivity with gas-phase species.

CONCLUSION

This work provides well-resolved measurements of sub–150-nm particles in the lower extratropical stratosphere over a wide range of stratospheric ages. Because the small particles were observed previously in limited observations in stratospheric air at altitudes <13 km, as well as in earlier test flights for this study, this bimodal structure is likely a consistent feature of the extratropical lower stratosphere.  ..."

ScienceAdviser

An unrecognized mode of small particles in the lower stratosphere (no public access)

When the once prestigious AAAS again promotes demagoguery and fallacies

Bad news! What a shame and pseudoscience by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)!

Because of the global reduction in air pollution, now we have to reflect the "sun's radiation back to space"? What a nonsense!

"Global warming [???] is bad news for polar bears, seals, and walruses; the Arctic sheets of seasonal sea ice they frequent have been on the decline for decades.

An ambitious idea seeks to intervene: sea ice thickening [???], where engineers drill through the ice and pump up ocean water to freeze on top in an attempt to delay summertime melting. If successful, the extra ice would also make the poles brighter, reflecting more of the sun’s radiation back to space [???] and lessening a dangerous climate feedback loop.

Like all geoengineering ideas, it’s controversial. But field trials have begun, and the first results are out: while pumping thickens ice, those gains don’t stick around. ..."

"A simple idea [??] underpins an audacious intervention to augment Arctic sea ice and slow the climate feedback loop accelerating its disappearance. Drill holes through a floe, pump seawater onto its surface, and let the cold do the rest. The first results from two field tests show the technique can thicken the ice. But they also show those gains don’t last. ..."

ScienceAdviser

Artificially engineered sea ice grows—but tests are too small to combat melting "First Arctic trials show pumped seawater can bulk up ice, but results aren’t lasting—and may not scale"

Coal Still Powers the World Economy

Only mostly Western countries are stupid enough not to rely on coal for power generation! In particular, Germany became a banana republic by e.g. demolishing working coal and nuclear fueled power plants!

While e.g. China built hundreds of new coal fired power plants in recent years!

High time to end the global warming hoax and climate change nonsense!

"But yet, here we are… global coal consumption has definitely not declined, quite the contrary, it has only grown from roughly 6 billion tons in 2008 ... to around 9 billion tons today. Not to mention the seaborne trade which almost doubled! So the question is not whether coal is disappearing as we were told, it’s whether we misunderstood this useful black rock in the first place. ..."

Coal Still Powers the World Economy "If you think coal is a thing of the past…then you are missing the big picture, which is far more complex and far more relevant than most headlines suggest ..."

Warum Europas KI-Pläne am Strom scheitern

Kein Wunder! Mit Windmühlen und Solarzellen ist der Bedarf nicht zu decken!

Europa und insbesondere die Bananenrepublik D ernten was sie säten mit dem Klimawahn (auch euphemistisch und fälschlich genannt Klimaneutralität)!

Wenn der Strombedarf von data centers/Rechenzentren nicht deutlich reduziert werden kann sieht die EU alt aus!

"... Es klafft eine Stromlücke von 80 TWh (finnischer Jahresstrombedarf 2025: 85 TWh), so Matilde Ciani vom Kiel Institut für Weltwirtschaft im neuen Kiel Policy Brief, sollte die EU wirklich ihre Ausbauziele für neue KI-Rechenzentren bis 2030 umsetzen können. ..."

"• Das globale Rennen um die KI-Führerschaft hat begonnen, und Europa versucht, vorne mitzuspielen. Es besteht jedoch eine deutliche Diskrepanz zwischen der Planung von Rechenzentrumskapazitäten und der Stromversorgungsplanung in der EU.

• Trotz ambitionierter Pläne droht die EU im globalen KI-Rennen weiter zurückzufallen: China will seine Rechenzentrumskapazität bis 2030 verdreifachen, die Vereinigten Staaten sind dabei, sie zu verdoppeln, wodurch Europa mit deutlich geringeren Anteilen an der globalen Kapazität zurückbleibt.

• Der Strombedarf der EU-Rechenzentren wird sich in den nächsten fünf Jahren voraussichtlich verdoppeln, von etwa 80 auf 168 TWh. Die obere Grenze dieses Bereichs entspricht dem gesamten Elektrizitätsbedarf einer europäischen Industrienation, beispielsweise dem Bedarf von Polen im Jahr 2024. Der Anteil des gesamten EU-Strombedarfs, der auf Rechenzentren entfällt, wird daher rasch von rund 2% im Jahr 2023 auf rund 5% im Jahr 2030 ansteigen.

• Die Deckung des zusätzlichen Strombedarfs, der durch Rechenzentren entstehen wird, ist nur möglich, wenn der Verbrauch der übrigen Wirtschaftsbereiche weit gehend konstant bleibt. Dies ist jedoch unwahrscheinlich, da der Bedarf auch in anderen Sektoren steigen wird, insbesondere im Wohnungsmarkt (Wärmepumpen) und im Verkehrssektor (Elektrofahrzeuge).

• Bis 2030 entsteht dadurch eine erhebliche Lücke zwischen Strombedarf und verfügbarer Elektrizität, die dem Netto-Stromverbrauch von Ländern wie Belgien oder Finnland im Jahr 2024 entspricht. Ohne vorausschauende Planung droht der Europäischen Union ein gefährliches Trilemma: Sie müsste zwischen Wachstum, Klimaneutralität [???] und einer führenden Rolle im KI-Rennen abwägen.

..."

Warum Europas KI-Pläne am Strom scheitern "Der KI-Boom frisst so viel Strom wie ganz Finnland – und die EU hat keinen Plan, woher die Energie kommen soll. Eine neue Studie des Kiel Instituts zeigt eine Lücke von 80 TWh bis 2030."

Auf dem Weg ins Debakel: Die Diskrepanz zwischen dem KI-Anspruch der EU und ihrer Energieplanung.

The implications of overshooting 1.5 °C on Earth system tipping elements—a review

Again a science journal publishes some rubbish about global warming! Fact is that climatology is a very complex science that we still do not understand very well. 

When pseudo scientists engage in alarmism and hysteria like with this article! Was this done for more funding?

1.5 °C is a joke by charlatans not scientists! Nobody is able to measure global atmospheric temperature with such accuracy!

"Tipping elements" or "tipping points" what is that? Smells a lot like junk science!

This article appears to repeat a litany of claims by environmentalists like "deforestation in the Amazon" etc.

From the abstract:

"Due to insufficient emission reductions in recent years, it is increasingly likely that global warming will exceed the 1.5 °C temperature limit in the late 2020s or 2030s. As a result, several Earth system tipping elements [???] could, at least temporarily, have their tipping points [???] surpassed, posing risks of large-scale and profound structural change.

Tipping does not always occur immediately upon crossing such a critical threshold. If the length of time the driver is beyond the critical level is short enough, tipping could still be avoided for some slow-responding elements of the climate system.

An improved understanding is therefore needed of whether tipping remains avoidable, for which systems, and under what conditions. Here, we review how minimising the magnitude and duration of any temperature overshoot beyond 1.5 °C could decrease tipping risks.

Tipping elements with fast response times, such as warm-water coral reefs, are especially vulnerable to overshoot. In contrast, those with slow response times, such as polar ice sheets, may be less sensitive to temporary overshoot. Potential interactions between tipping elements and additional human pressures, such as deforestation in the Amazon or pollution and overfishing of coral reef habitats, may further lower tipping points, narrowing the range of overshoot trajectories that can still avoid it.

The vulnerability of many tipping elements, even under shorter overshoot conditions, underscores that global warming must peak below 2 °C [???] above pre-industrial levels, return to below 1.5 °C as quickly as possible (i.e. within this century), and to around 1 °C thereafter to limit tipping point risks."

The implications of overshooting 1.5 °C on Earth system tipping elements—a review - IOPscience

Fig. 2. Overshooting 1.5 °C risks crossing Earth system tipping points. Illustrative temperature overshoot pathways, exceeding and then returning to below 1.5 °C (solid black line) and other stabilisation pathways (dashed black lines), dependent on uncertainties in future emissions and Earth system feedbacks.

Energiewende: Hohe Kapazität, wenig Produktion

Empfehlenswert! Mehr schein als sein!

"In der festen Überzeugung, dann nicht mehr auf fossile Energieträger zurückgreifen zu müssen, die uns den konjunkturellen Aufschwung versauen. Doch so einfach ist die Sache nicht. Tatsächlich wurden die Kapazitäten, insbesondere die erneuerbaren, in der EU stark ausgebaut. Die paradoxe Entwicklung dabei ist nur, dass die Produktion nicht Schritt hält. Während sich die installierte Gesamtkapazität seit 2000 fast verdoppelt hat, verharrt die Erzeugung weitgehend auf der Stelle, wie unsere Grafik zeigt.

Der Grund liegt im System selbst. Erneuerbare Energien haben einen geringeren und vor allem stärker schwankenden Wirkungsgrad als fossile Kraftwerke. Die Sonne scheint nicht immer, der Wind weht nicht konstant."

Werden uns die Erneuerbaren retten? – Agenda Austria "Hätten wir doch nur die Energiewende stärker vorangetrieben! So oder so ähnlich schallt es im Zuge der abermaligen Energiekrise aus aller Munde."

Earth's 40,000-year tilt cycle links Antarctic ice growth to subtropical productivity

Much of the so called global warming/climate change is most likely caused by variations in solar activity or various regular, recurrent movements of the earth axis. I have blogged about this multiple times.

"... The study ... found that the obliquity cycle—a 40,000-year astronomical cycle tied to changes in Earth's axial tilt—influenced ocean productivity in subtropical latitudes about 34 million years ago, when the Antarctic ice sheet was first expanding. ..."

From the significance and abstract:

"Significance

The impact of Antarctic cryosphere dynamics on global marine ecosystems, under the anticipated elevated atmospheric pCO2-levels of our future, is a question of broad societal importance. Newly acquired geologic data from the subtropical South Atlantic provide the first evidence of a highly synchronized 40-kyr-scale teleconnection between Antarctic ice sheet evolution, physical oceanography, and subtropical marine bioproductivity following the Eocene–Oligocene Transition, under pCO2-levels that exceed that of today. This work underscores the sensitivity of the marine-based ice sheets of Antarctica to oceanic heat delivery—with linkages to meridional temperature gradients and pCO2—yielding important implications for marine bioproductivity in our future warming world.

Abstract

The inception of the Antarctic ice sheet (AIS) marked a major global climatic reorganization of the Cenozoic, but the response of the subtropical marine biosphere remains poorly constrained.

A new sediment archive from the subtropical South Atlantic (IODP Exp. 390 and 393) reveals a sevenfold increase in surface ocean bioproductivity proxy accumulation (biogenic barium) commensurate with the initial expansion of the AIS 34 Mya, and the emergence of an amplified astronomical forcing of subtropical bioproductivity that mirrors the subsequent evolution of the AIS in the early Oligocene.

We find that a strong 40-kyr obliquity response characterizes subtropical bioproductivity following the initial establishment of an expansive marine-based AIS. Portions of the AIS in contact with the marine environment are sensitive to meridional heat delivery controlled by obliquity-forced interactions between the atmosphere and ocean, which can propagate to the lower latitudes via Southern Ocean overturning circulation.

The surprising emergence of obliquity forcing of low-latitude bioproductivity enhances our understanding of global teleconnections and feedbacks that regulate global climate, and points to mechanisms driving global marine bioproductivity on astronomical timescales—and their intricate connections to the evolution of the cryosphere."

Earth's 40,000-year tilt cycle links Antarctic ice growth to subtropical productivity

High-latitude teleconnections drive subtropical marine bioproductivity at the dawn of the Antarctic ice sheet (no public access)

Past greenhouse gas emissions will cost global economy trillions | Stanford Report. Really!

Shocking! Even the Stanford University promotes such nonsense!

Not enough, Nature journal published this dubious research! There is at least a 50 years long history in Western countries of dubious calculations of environmental damages. It is e.g. a cherry picking exercise much liked by biased scientists!

What about e.g. global population growth? What about China?

"In brief

• Researchers developed a new framework for calculating “loss and damage,” or harms from climate change that countries can’t prevent by cutting emissions or avoid through adaptation.
• U.S. emissions since 1990 have caused more than $10 trillion in global economic damages, with roughly a third of the damage hitting the country’s own GDP.
• Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is a potential alternative to compensation for damages caused, but becomes much less effective if action is delayed [???].

..."

From the abstract:

"Climate change is causing measurable harm globally. Political and legal efforts seek to link these damages with specific emissions, including in discussions of loss and damage (L&D); however, no quantitative definition of L&D exists, nor is there a framework to link past and future emissions from specific sources to monetized, location-specific damages.

Here we develop such a framework, which is integrated with recent efforts to estimate the social cost of carbon. Using empirical estimates of the non-linear relationship between temperature and aggregate economic output, we show that future damages from past emissions—one component of L&D—are at least an order of magnitude larger than historical damages from the same emissions.

For instance, one tonne of CO2 emitted in 1990 caused US$180 in discounted global damages by 2020 ($40–530) and will cause an additional $1,840 through 2100 ($500–5,700).

Thus, settling debts for past damages will not settle debts for past emissions.

In other illustrative estimates, a single long-haul flight per year over the past decade leads to about $25k ($6,000–77,000) in future damages by 2100, and US emissions since 1990 caused $500 billion ($180–1,300 billion) of damage in India and $330 billion ($110–820 billion) in Brazil. Carbon removal offers an alternative to transfer payments for settling L&D, but is increasingly ineffective in limiting damages as the delay between emission and recapture increases."

Past greenhouse gas emissions will cost global economy trillions | Stanford Report "Future climate damages from past emissions dwarf the economic harm already inflicted, a new study shows."

Quantifying climate loss and damage consistent with a social cost of carbon (open access)

China bringt 52 neue Kohlekraftwerke ans Netz – 2025 größter Zubau seit einem Jahrzehnt

Wie China die vielen, deutschen Klimawahnbesessenen seit vielen Jahre verarscht hat!

In der Bananenrepublik D wurden Kern- und Kohlekraftwerke abgeschaltet, während China hunderte neue Kohlekraftwerke baute!

"China trieb 2025 den Zubau der Kohlekraft voran und nahm 52 Großblöcke (je ≥1 GW) in Betrieb. Das zeigt der CREA/Global Energy Monitor-Bericht. Es ist der höchste Wert seit zehn Jahren, in denen jeweils weniger als 20 solcher Großblöcke ans Netz gingen. Auslöser waren die Stromengpässe in den Jahren 2021 und 2022, als Fabriken die Produktion drosseln mussten und eine Stadt rollierende Abschaltungen einführte. Peking priorisierte deshalb die Versorgungssicherheit, durch den massiven Ausbau an Kohlekraftwerken. Die Folgen reichen von stabilerem Industriestrom bis zu höheren Klimarisiken, weil neue Kohleblöcke später hohe Laufzeiten erlangen."

China bringt 52 neue Kohlekraftwerke ans Netz – 2025 größter Zubau seit einem Jahrzehnt – KlimaNachrichten

WMO: State of the Global Climate 2025, Earth’s climate swings increasingly out of balance. Really!

The World Meteorological Organization: What a purveyor of alarmism and hysteria! Is WMO desperate for more funding?

Fact is we still understand very little about the complex phenomena such as climate and oceanology!

How far does "observed history" go back in time? 100 years? More? How much was observed more than 100 years ago?

What a pretense of knowledge! "1.43 °C above the 1850-1900 average"! Laughable! Who are they trying to fool with such pretentious precision! How much is the uncertainty about this measurement (which has been conveniently omitted by the WMO)?

What about e.g. the Medieval Warm Period?

Let's not forget, the so called greenhouse gases (what a nice propaganda term) are nothing but trace gases in the atmosphere, some of them, like CO2, are life essential.

Hopefully, President Trump has stopped any further funding of this ludicrous international organization!

"WMO’s State of the Global Climate report 2025 confirms that 2015-2025 are the hottest 11-years on record, and that 2025 was the second or third hottest year on record, at about 1.43 °C above the 1850-1900 average. Extreme events around the world, including intense heat, heavy rainfall and tropical cyclones, caused disruption and devastation and highlighted the vulnerability of our inter-connected economies and societies. ...

For the first time, the report includes the Earth’s energy imbalance as one of the key climate indicators.

The Earth’s energy balance measures the rate at which energy enters and leaves the Earth system. Under a stable climate, incoming energy from the sun is about the same as the amount of outgoing energy.  

However, increasing concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases - carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide - to their highest level in at least 800,000 years have upset this equilibrium.

The Earth’s energy imbalance has increased since its observational record began in 1960, particularly in the past 20 years. It reached a new high in 2025. ..."

From the summary of the annual report:

"- Earth’s energy imbalance is at its highest level on record.

- The past 11 years are the warmest on record, and 2025 was among the three warmest globally.

- The ocean is warmer and more acidic than ever in the observed record.

- Climate extremes are posing growing risks to lives, food security, health, and economies

"

"The Earth’s climate is more out of balance than at any time in observed history, as greenhouse gas concentrations drive continued warming of the atmosphere and ocean and melting of ice, according to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). These rapid and large-scale changes have occurred within a few decades but will have harmful repercussions for hundreds – and potentially thousands – of years. [???] ..."

State of the Global Climate 2025

Earth’s climate swings increasingly out of balance (WMO press release)

Credits: „Jeder Indikator steht auf Rot“: WMO veröffentlicht Klimabericht 2025

Annual global mean temperature anomalies relative to a pre-industrial (1850–1900) baseline. Data are from the datasets indicated in the legend.

Wind- und Sonnenenergie verschlingen weiter Milliarden Euros in Subventionen

Wie der Klimawahn D in eine Bananenrepublik verwandelte!

Wenn Gartenzwerge regieren, die von vielen dümmlichen, naiven Wählern gewählt werden!

"Die Jahresabrechnung der Stromnetzbetreiber über die Subvention von Windkraft- und Solaranlagen für 2025 liegt vor. Danach haben Windkraft- und Solarbetreiber im Jahr 2025 16,5 Milliarden Euro Zuschuss aus dem Bundeshaushalt erhalten. Betreiber dieser Anlagen bekommen 20 Jahre lang eine Einspeisevergütung von 6-12 €ct/kWh (je nach Anlage). Immer dann, wenn die Einspeisevergütung unterschritten wird, wird die Differenz aus dem Klima- und Transformationsfonds des Bundes erstattet. Das passiert, wenn zu viel Windenergie und Solarenergie (zumeist mittags) eingespeist werden. Dann sinkt der Strompreis gegen Null und der Betreiber erhält trotzdem die Festvergütung. Diese Milliarden werden bezahlt von den Mietern und den Autofahrern, die über den CO2-Preis bei der Gas- und Ölheizung sowie an der Tankstelle abkassiert werden. ..."

Wind und Sonne stellen fette Rechnungen "2025 kassierten Wind- und Solarbetreiber 16,5 Milliarden Euro Zuschuss für Strom, der oft wertlos war, verschenkt oder gar nicht produziert wurde. Die Zeche zahlen Mieter, Autofahrer und Betriebe, während die Politik das teure Irrsinnssystem weiter verteidigt."

Wenn Windparks die Strömungen der Nordsee langfristig bremsen

Windparks sind nicht harmlos! 

Windparks verschandeln die Landschaft!

Windparks töten tonnenweise Vögel, Fledermäuse, und Insekten!

Ist es nicht interessant, dass der Artikel nur die Gigawatt, aber nicht die Anzahl der neu geplanten Windturbinen erwähnt?

"Ein Offshore-Windpark in der Nordsee: Je höher die Windräder sind und je weiter sie auseinander stehen, desto geringer ihr Einfluss auf die Umwelt.

Offshore-Windenergie bietet viele Chancen. Doch der geplante starke Zubau birgt auch Risiken. Helmholtz-Forscher erwarten langfristig eine deutlich veränderte Meeresströmung.

Die Nordsee soll zum „grünen Kraftwerk Europas“ ausgebaut werden. Bis zum Jahr 2050 sollen Offshore-Windparks mit einer installierten Leistung von bis zu 300 Gigawatt entstehen. Allein im deutschen Nordsee-Gebiet sind Anlagen 70 Gigawatt geplant – verglichen mit aktuell etwa acht Gigawatt. Gerade erst haben die Nordsee-Anrainerstaaten auf dem Nordsee-Gipfel umfangreiche Maßnahmen beschlossen, um durch bessere Kooperation und Investitionsanreize den Offshore-Ausbau voranzutreiben. Jetzt aber lässt eine Studie des Helmholtz-Instituts Hereon aufhorchen.

Demnach hat der massive Ausbau der Windparks absehbar erhebliche Wirkungen auf die Nordsee. Die Strömungsmuster könnten sich großräumig verändern, warnt eine Forschergruppe um den Studienleiter Nils Christiansen, die erstmals die Auswirkungen analysiert und ihr Ausmaß für das Ausbauszenario im Jahr 2050 berechnet hat. Die Arbeit der Wissenschaftler, die im Nature-Fachjournal Communications Earth & Environment vorgestellt wurde, zeigt auch Ansätze auf, wie die Risiken frühzeitig minimiert werden könnten."

Helmholtz-Studie: Meeresströmung verändert sich durch Windräder in der Nordsee | FAZ "Offshore-Windenergie bietet viele Chancen. Doch der geplante starke Zubau birgt auch Risiken. Helmholtz-Forscher erwarten langfristig eine deutlich veränderte Meeresströmung."

Das Begleitfoto des Artikels ist auch eine schöne Manipulation der FAZ, da es nur drei Windturbinen zeigt und nicht den ganzen Wald von Windturbinen!

Antarctic sea ice rebounds in 2026, nearing average after four years. Really!

I believe, the shrinking of the Antarctic ice cover was also used as "evidence" for global warming/climate change. However, it appears the ice cover naturally varies from year to year or so.

Notice satellite measurement data only goes back to 1979!

"The area covered by Antarctic sea ice likely reached its annual minimum level at 2.58 million square kilometers (996,000 square miles) on Feb. 26, according to scientists at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Every year Antarctic sea ice reaches a minimum level during the Southern Hemisphere's summer, so this is the point that scientists measure it for annual readings.

This year's level ranks as the 16th smallest since satellite measurements began in 1979.

The 2026 minimum sea ice extent is closer to average than in the past four years, and 730,000 square kilometers above the record low set in February 2023, the scientists said. ...

This year's return to less extreme conditions is not unexpected given the large year-to-year variation of Antarctic sea ice seen in the satellite record," said Walt Meier, scientist at the NASA NSIDC Distributed Active Archive Center."

Antarctic sea ice rebounds in 2026, nearing average after four years "Antarctic sea ice coverage has likely rebounded this year, coming closer to its annual summer average after four years of extreme lows, US scientists said Monday."

IPCC's Earth Energy Imbalance Assessment is Based on Physically Invalid Argo-Float-Based Estimates of Global Ocean Heat Content

Dedicated to all climate skeptics! More evidence of sloppy science and alarmism and hysteria!

Global warming is a hoax and climate change is a religion and superstition!

Climate on earth is a very complex phenomena that humans still understand very poorly! We still can not even forecast weather accurately for over 48 hours!

"An international team of scientists has published groundbreaking research revealing that the primary measurement used to support claims of planetary “warming” is fundamentally flawed and scientifically invalid. The paper, published in Science of Climate Change, demonstrates that ocean heat content (OHC) estimates, which underpin the IPCC climate assessments, are based on physically meaningless calculations that violate basic 150-year-old principles of thermodynamics and fail to meet the standards of the scientific method.

The research team ... conducted the first comprehensive analysis of how global OHC is actually measured and calculated. Their findings reveal that the widely cited figure in IPCC AR6 showing Earth accumulating energy at a rate of 0.7 ± 0.2 watts per square meter has an actual uncertainty roughly ten times larger than what the IPCC claims, making the central value “statistically indistinguishable from zero.” “The public has been told that the ocean is ‘warming’ and absorbing over 90% of ‘excess’ planetary heat,” explained Cohler. “But when we examined how these numbers are actually calculated, we found they represent computational artifacts rather than measurements of real physical energy rendering the entire process a category error.” The analysis focuses on data from the international Argo float program, a network of approximately 4,000 autonomous floats that drift through the ocean measuring temperature and other data. These measurements form the backbone of modern climate assessments, including those by the IPCC.

Even leaving aside the fundamental category error, for the sake of argument, this research nonetheless reveals multiple fundamental problems with how this data is processed.

The floats measure temperature at specific locations and depths during their 10-day cycles, but their exact underwater positions remain unknown because they lack navigation equipment while submerged. The system assigns all measured values to the location where the float surfaces once every 10 days, potentially mislocating data by tens of kilometers. The floats are typically spaced 200–500 km (120–300 miles) apart. These sparse measurements are spread across vast ocean surface area and volume using mathematical interpolation, essentially filling in unmeasured areas using assumptions rather than observations.

Most critically, the calculations violate a scientific principle established more than a century ago: temperature cannot be meaningfully averaged across systems that are not in equilibrium. “Temperature describes the state of a specific location at a specific moment,” noted co-author Dr. David R. Legates. “Averaging temperatures from different water masses separated by hundreds of kilometers and weeks of time produces a number, but that number doesn’t correspond to any physical reality.” ..."

From the abstract:

"Global ocean heat content (OHC) anomalies and derived Earth Energy Imbalance (EEI) estimates, central to contemporary climate assessments including IPCC AR6, are constructed through processes that violate the scientific method. These metrics rely almost exclusively on temperature

data from the Argo profiling float array. Their validity and reliability hinge on several critical but herein refuted assumptions about measurement representativeness, interpolation/extrapolation methods, the physical meaning of anomalies, and integration conventions. Core Argo and Biogeochemical Argo floats deliver discrete, point measurements of intensive properties like temperature along irregular, untracked three-dimensional trajectories during ascent from 2000 m to the surface. This samples only the upper ocean, excluding roughly 50% of total ocean volume and thermal energy. Horizontal positions are recorded only at surface intervals ~10 days apart, leaving subsurface locations entirely unknown. All data from each ascent are arbitrarily assigned to the

surfacing position, introducing unknown horizontal offsets (up to 50 km) and temporal offsets (up to 10 hours) for the deepest measurements. Anomalies are computed by subtracting values from statistically derived reference climatologies based on sparse historical data over arbitrary

baseline periods. Measured temperatures are then interpolated onto global 3D grids using prescribed covariance functions. These anomalies represent numerical differences without physical meaning as temperature deviations, because temperature, an intensive property, is not additive across non-equilibrium spatial or temporal domains (Essex et al., 2007; Essex & Andresen, 2018). The integrated OHC scalar depends heavily on arbitrary averaging and interpolation rules, producing computational artifacts rather than measures of actual ocean energy uptake or planetary radiative imbalance. Derived EEI values, such as the 0.7 ± 0.2 W m⁻² in IPCC AR6 Figure 7.2, inherit these biases and stem from circular methodology: CERES satellite top-of-atmosphere radiative flux measurements (absolute uncertainties ± 3–5 W m⁻² or higher) are adjusted via least-

squares to match Argo OHC-derived estimates, rather than offering independent validation. We rigorously quantify major uncertainty sources, including unresolved mesoscale variability (± 0.9 W m⁻²), deep ocean ignorance bounds (± 0.35 W m⁻² from sparse Deep Argo), polar under-

sampling (± 0.1 W m⁻²), Nyquist-Shannon aliasing in sparse deep ocean and polar sampling, sealevel budget closure discrepancy between satellite altimetry/gravimetry and Argo OHC (±0.33 Wm-2), arbitrary baseline choices (± 0.2 W m⁻²), Eulerian-Lagrangian discrepancies (± 0.25 W m⁻²),

and untracked trajectories and positional assignments. Although the concepts of OHC and EEI are thermodynamically well-defined physical quantities, the numerical values produced by current Argo-based methodologies are physically meaningless computational constructs that do not validly represent those quantities. We conclude that EEI uncertainties reach >± 1 W m⁻² at 95% confidence, roughly an order of magnitude larger than the uncertainty that IPCC AR6 reports, rendering current OHC change and EEI estimates statistically indistinguishable from zero."

Press Release: IPCC's Earth Energy Imbalance Assessment is Based on Physically Invalid Argo-Float-Based Estimates of Global Ocean Heat Content

IPCC’s Earth Energy Imbalance Assessment is Based on Physically Invalid Argo-Float-Based Estimates of Global Ocean Heat Content

It’s time to pull the plug on plug-in hybrids

What a waste of taxpayers' money given the e.g. $7,500 federal tax subsidy [credits] for the purchase of such vehicles!

Apparently, these plug-in hybrids also do not meet reductions in CO2 emissions as expected!

"Plug-in hybrid vehicles are often touted as a bridge to battery-electric vehicles, promising to slash emissions by operating as EVs for short trips while relying on fossil fuels for longer ones. ...

They only deliver on that promise if they’re regularly charged. Real-world data drawn from the vehicles’ onboard computers shows that’s often not the case.

Using that data, the Fraunhofer Institute could determine how much of that energy came from charging when plugged in. It found that less than a third of 1 million PHEVs in Germany plugged in either occasionally or not at all. ...

Studies have previously shown that PHEVs produce about 3.5 times more emissions than their official ratings would suggest. This new study explains why since it directly assesses how much electricity the vehicles gained from charging. (PHEVs, like all hybrids, can operate in a mixed mode, using both gas and electricity. The study used data straight off the vehicles to disentangle the two.)

One of PHEV’s many shortcomings are their anemic batteries, capable of powering the vehicle for short distances. Some can only traverse a handful of miles, while many sold in recent years can operate on battery power for about 20 to 30 miles. ..."

From the abstract:

"The energy consumption of plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) is significantly higher in real-world driving than in type approval procedures. An evaluation of one million vehicles highlights this major difference and points to the need for action in EU emissions regulation."

"... Plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) are sometimes treated as a bridging technology and benefit from favorable credits toward CO₂ fleet targets in European regulations. Type-approval is based on assumptions about high electric driving shares, which are not confirmed in practice. Current OBFCM data show that the real fuel consumption of PHEVs averages around 5.8–6.1 l/100 km, which corresponds to CO₂ emissions of around 140 g CO2/km. Even under optimal charging conditions (= driving exclusively in charge-depleting mode), today's PHEVs do not achieve truly low emission ..."

It’s time to pull the plug on plug-in hybrids | TechCrunch

Regulatory adjustments needed for plug-in hybrid vehicles in Europe. Policy Brief

Record-breaking Antarctic drill sediment core of over 225 m length reveals 23 million years of climate history

Amazing stuff! Global warming aka climate change is normal and has repeated itself over thousands of years!

Possibly, variations in solar activity of the sun are to be blamed!

"... "To our knowledge, the longest sediment cores previously drilled under an ice sheet are less than 10 m," ... "We exceeded our target of 200 m, and undertook this 700 km from the nearest base—this is Antarctic frontier science." ...

The 228 m of ancient mud and rock was drilled from under 523 m of ice at a deep-field camp at Crary Ice Rise on the edge of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. ...

The new sediment core ... provides a direct and comprehensive record of how this margin of the ice sheet has behaved during past periods of warmth. ...

including time periods when Earth's global average temperatures were significantly higher than 2°C above pre-industrial," ..."

"... The sediment core holds an archive of past environmental conditions from warmer periods in Earth’s history ..."

Record-breaking Antarctic drill reveals 23 million years of climate history

Record-breaking sediment core provides unprecedented evidence of West Antarctic Ice Sheet retreat

On the atmospheric methane hysteria and alarmism

Methane is an atmospheric trace gas like CO2!

Maybe it is the fluctuations of solar activity of the sun and not these trace gases that cause global warming and cooling!

According to Google search: "Atmospheric methane concentrations reached a record high of over 1,900 parts per billion (ppb), or approximately 1.9 parts per million (ppm), in 2021, which is about 260% of pre-industrial levels" and "As of early 2026, the global average atmospheric CO2 concentration is approximately 427 parts per million (ppm), marking a roughly 50% increase since the Industrial Revolution (280 ppm)."

"Solving the mystery of a methane surge ... Methane is the second most important radiative forcing agent [???] among all the anthropogenic trace greenhouse gases, with a climate warming effect second only to carbon dioxide. Therefore, it is important to understand why its atmospheric concentration changes. Its global atmospheric abundance [???] is growing steadily but not monotonically, and the question of what factors are responsible for the variability the methane growth rate is a key one.

The long-term secular rise of atmospheric methane concentrations is, unsurprisingly, due largely to anthropogenic methane emissions from agriculture, the oil and gas industry, and waste management, which together contribute more than half of all global methane emissions. ..."

ScienceAdviser

China's emissions policies are helping climate change but also creating a new problem for global warming/climate change

The sun, not anthropogenic CO2 is the dominant factor for warming and cooling on earth! How variable is the sun's output?

Air pollution prevents global warming! 😊

"China's sweeping efforts to clean up its air have delivered one of the biggest public health success stories of recent decades. Since the Air Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan was launched in 2013, coal-fired power plants have been fitted with scrubbers, heavy industry has been modernized and pollution standards tightened, leading to an over 50% reduction in atmospheric particulate matter. ...

In the atmosphere, sulfur dioxide forms sulfate aerosols, tiny particles that reflect incoming solar radiation back into space, leading to a cooling influence on the planet.

The combined aerosol radiative forcing is thought to have offset approximately one-third of global warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions. However, as emissions fall, fewer sulfate aerosols form, meaning less sunlight is reflected and more solar radiation reaches Earth's surface, contributing to global warming. ..."

From the abstract:

"Anthropogenic emissions over China have recently declined due to environmental actions. This work estimates the sensitivity of sulfate aerosol (SO4) concentration to the amount of SO2  emissions reduction over China from 2010 to 2020 using an Earth system model with two different aerosol representations. We find that a larger rate of SO2  emissions decline over 2010–2020 from an updated Chinese emission inventory leads to improvement in modeled SO2  and SO4  concentrations when evaluated with targeted airborne observations from the Asian summer monsoon region from the 2022 Asian summer monsoon Chemical and Climate Impact Project. Updated Chinese SO2 emissions reduce SO4  concentration by >20% at 200 hPa over the North Pacific, and by >7% at 100 hPa throughout the tropics. These SO4  reductions result in an increase to global net instantaneous radiative forcing of ca. 0.10–0.15 W m-2  by 2020, with regional effects up to ca. 6 times greater."

China's emissions policies are helping climate change but also creating a new problem

Reduction of Global Sulfate Aerosol Concentration and Corresponding Radiative Effects From Recent Chinese SO2 Emission Reduction (open access)

Trumps Abkehr von der Klimapolitik ist eine Zeitenwende – eine Chance für Deutschland von Roland Tichy

Wird die Bananenrepublik D endlich auch den Klimawahn aufgeben!

Globale Erwärmung/Klimawandel war ein totaler Betrug und Demagogie! Es wurde benutzt, um die Bürger Untertanen zu machen!

"Donald Trump hat diese Woche das Fundament der amerikanischen Klimapolitik nicht nur erschüttert – er hat es systematisch demontiert. In Washington kündigte er gemeinsam mit EPA-Chef Lee Zeldin an, die sogenannte „Endangerment Finding“ aus dem Jahr 2009 aufzuheben. Dieses juristische Kernstück war der Grundstein dafür, dass die US-Umweltbehörde EPA Treibhausgase als Gesundheits- und Umweltrisiko klassifizieren und regulieren durfte – sei es bei Autos, Kraftwerken oder Fabriken. ..."

Trumps Abkehr von der Klimapolitik ist eine Zeitenwende – eine Chance für Deutschland